Journal of Endovascular Therapy最新文献

Introduction: The treatment of acute type B aortic dissection (ATBAD) is currently a challenge for vascular surgeons, because of the early morbidity and mortality rates and the high risk of late aortic events up to 50% at 5 years. This study presents the initial outcomes of ATBAD treatment using optimal medical therapy alone or combined with proximal entry tear stent-graft coverage. Additionally, it provides an analysis of the evolution of the aortic diameter and its clinical consequences during the chronic phase in each group.

Materials and methods: Conducted as a retrospective, single-center study, we enrolled all consecutive ATBAD patients (n=130) treated between 2008 and 2020. The primary analysis studies the entire patient cohort based on their initial management approach, namely, medical treatment alone for uncomplicated ATBAD (n=67) or combined with stent-graft entry tear coverage (n=63). We also conducted a subgroup analysis to investigate factors associated with disease progression in the medical management group.

Results: Median follow-up was 29.5 months. During this time aneurysmal evolution was observed in: 42.4% of cases in the medical group compared with 21.8% in the stent-graft group, primarily affecting the thoracic aorta. The stent-graft group exhibited significant aortic remodeling, with a decrease in false lumen (FL) and thoracic aortic diameters. Initial aortic diameter ≥40 mm and FL ≥22 mm were independent risk factors for aneurysmal degeneration. Five-year survival was consistent at 76.1% in both groups.

Conclusion: This study confirms the safety and efficacy of stent-graft entry tear coverage for ATBAD. Initial thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) appears to reduce late aortic events by promoting aortic remodeling. Considering TEVAR's safety and potential to prevent late aortic complications, it may be considered for uncomplicated ATBAD patients with an initial aortic diameter ≥40 mm or an FL ≥22 mm.Clinical ImpactThis study validates the efficacy and safety of using endovascular stent grafts to seal the proximal entry tear in cases of acute type B aortic dissections, compared to optimal medical therapy. Aortic remodelling significantly benefits from endovascular stent graft coverage of the proximal entry tear. Given the heightened risk of late aortic events observed in the medical therapy cohort, there appears to be a necessity for including endovascular interventions in the management of uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissections, particularly when aortic diameter is ≥40 mm and false lumen diameter is ≥22 mm.

Objective: The study aimed to investigate the early results of directional femoral ultrasound-guided compression technique (UCT) using in percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy (PMT) for acute deep vein thrombosis (DVT).

Methods: Consecutive single-center patients with acute iliofemoral DVT who underwent PMT from January 2020 to December 2021 were included. Directional femoral UCT was used to adjust the PMT catheter into the residual thrombus in the inguinal region by ultrasound compression to improve the thrombus clearance rate. Patients were retrospectively analyzed and divided into 2 groups based on PMT with or without directional femoral UCT. The primary efficacy outcome was the incidence of post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) at 24-month follow-up. The secondary efficacy outcomes included common femoral venous thrombus removal grade, total thrombus removal grade, venous primary patency rate, and incidence of moderate-to-severe PTS at 24-month follow-up. The safety outcomes included complications, major bleeding events, and death at 24-month follow-up.

Results: A total of 96 patients were included in the study: 42 patients underwent PMT with directional femoral UCT and 54 patients underwent PMT without UCT. There was no significant difference in baseline characteristics between the 2 groups. The percentages of patients achieved common femoral venous thrombus removal grade 3 and total thrombus removal grade 3 were significantly higher in the PMT with UCT group than those in the PMT without UCT group (p<0.001). The 24-month primary patency rate was significantly higher in the PMT with UCT group than that in the PMT without UCT group (90.0% vs 71.2%, p=0.027). The incidence of PTS was significantly lower in the PMT with UCT group (10.0%) than that in the PMT without UCT group (28.8%) (p=0.027).

Conclusion: PMT with directional femoral UCT could improve the thrombus clearance rate and primary patency rate of acute iliofemoral DVT and might decrease the incidence of PTS compared to traditional PMT treatment without UCT.Clinical ImpactResidual thrombus in common femoral vein is a difficult problem associated with higher incidence of PTS. Few studies have focused on common femoral venous thrombus clearance. PMT with directional femoral UCT could improve the thrombus clearance rate and primary patency rate of acute iliofemoral DVT, and might decrease the incidence of PTS compared to traditional PMT treatment without UCT. Directional femoral UCT is recommended in PMT treatment of acute iliofemoral DVT.

Purpose: The treatment of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) using branched endovascular aortic repair (BEVAR) is safe and effective. During deployment, the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) branch can unintentionally open into the celiac trunk (CT) ostium and switched catheterization of the SMA from the CT branch and the CT from the SMA branch can be used as an alternative technique in these cases. This study aimed to investigate the outcome of exchanging the intended target vessels (TVs) for the CT and SMA branches during BEVAR.

Materials and methods: A single-center retrospective analysis of patients with TAAAs who underwent BEVAR, using off-the-shelf or custom-made devices (CMDs), with an unintended exchange of TVs for the CT and SMA branches was performed.

Results: Between 2014 and 2023, 397 patients were treated with BEVAR for TAAA. Eighteen (4.5%) of those patients were treated with an exchange of TVs for the CT and SMA branches. T-branch was used in 9 cases (50%) and the remaining patients were treated with CMDs. Twelve patients were treated electively, 3 were symptomatic and 3 presented with rupture. Of 36 mesenteric TVs in those 18 patients, 34 (94%) were catheterized successfully, including all 18 SMAs and 16 of the 18 CTs. No branch stenosis or occlusion of the switched mesenteric TVs was detected during follow-up. During 30-day follow-up, 3 patients died and during a median follow-up of 3 (interquartile range [IQR]: 1-15) months 3 more patients died. None of the deaths or the 2 unintended reinterventions was induced by the mesenteric TV exchange. The median hospital stay was 14 (IQR: 9-22) days with a median of 4 (IQR: 2-11) days at the intensive care unit.

Conclusion: The exchange of the mesenteric TVs for the CT and SMA branches during BEVAR with off-the-shelf and CMD endografts is feasible with good TV patency and freedom from TV-related reinterventions. This alternative technique should be considered in selected cases when direct catheterization via the intended branch is deemed more time-consuming or not feasible.Clinical ImpactThis is the first description of using an exchange of target vessels for the celiac trunk and the superior mesenteric artery branches in patients with thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms undergoing BEVAR, using off-the-shelf or custom-made devices. The high success rate as well as the good clinical results without any branch stenosis or occlusion during follow-up highlight the feasibility of this alternative technique. It could help in challenging cases when catheterization of the intended target vessels is not possible or too time consuming, resulting in higher success rates of BEVAR and better clinical results.

Purpose: To present a novel technique for the treatment of heavily calcified aorto-iliac disease using intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) and self-expanding bare-metal stents (BMS).

Technique: We present our experience with 4 cases of calcified aorto-iliac disease that were treated with IVL as vessel preparation followed by BMS deployment. Intravascular lithotripsy was performed using a 7-mm or 8-mm Shockwave catheter from 1 access and a non-compliant balloon introduced from the second access in a "hugging-balloon" configuration. Afterward, a self-expandable BMS is deployed in the infrarenal aorta and additional bare-metal balloon-mounted stents are deployed in the iliac arteries as needed. This technique provides a low-profile solution with only 6- and 7-French introducers, preservation of the collateral circulation while also preserving the option for an up-and-over approach in the future. Technical success was achieved in all cases and no periprocedural complications were observed.

Conclusion: Intravascular lithotripsy in combination with BMS for the infrarenal aorta and the aortic bifurcation seems to be a safe and effective low-profile treatment option for heavily calcified lesions. Large-scale studies with long-term follow-up are needed to validate our positive early results.Clinical ImpactEndovascular treatment of heavily calcified aortoiliac disease poses significant challenges, including the risk of rupture and dissection. The proposed technique uses intravascular lithotripsy and bare-metal stenting of the aortic bifurcation and represents a low-profile solution that preserves collaterals and potentially reduces the risk of dissection with IVL vessel preparation.

Purpose: This study aimed to assess the feasibility and short-term outcomes of different manufactured proximal and distal stent graft components during fenestrated endovascular aortic repair (FEVAR).

Materials and methods: A multicenter retrospective review was conducted at 3 aortic centers, involving all consecutive patients who underwent FEVAR utilizing a customized Dacron-based tubular proximal and a distal bifurcated polytetrafluoreten (PTFE)-based commercially available stent grafts. Primary outcomes were 30 day mortality, major adverse events, and technical and clinical success. Secondary outcomes assessed stent graft migration, occurrence of types I/III endoleak, and reintervention.

Results: A total of 23 FEVAR cases across all centers were included in this study. Technical success was achieved in all cases, with a median procedure time of 183 (153-244) minutes. There were no major adverse events, except for 1 transient acute renal failure. The median follow-up period was 23 (17-28) months. All target vessels retained patent with the exception of 1 right renal fenestration that showed signs of kinking at the first follow-up, and despite secondary intervention with relining and distal extension, there was an occlusion afterward and 1 hepatic artery with a separate fenestration. This and 1 successful relining of a superior mesenteric artery kink were the only reinterventions in this cohort. One case of persistent type 1b endoleak was reported in a patient with chronic type B aortic dissection, which resolved with distal extension on the external iliac artery 5 months after the index procedure. No deaths occurred throughout the follow-up with, and there were no signs of stent graft migration or type 3 endoleak.

Conclusion: The use of commercially available PTFE-based bifurcated stent grafts to extend distally the tubular graft appears to be a feasible approach during FEVAR, with promising short-term outcomes. Further studies are necessary to define the applicability of this solution and evaluate long-term outcomes.Clinical ImpactThis multicentric study on fenestrated endovascular aortic repair (FEVAR) demonstrates the feasibility and good short-term outcomes of utilizing a PTFE-based commercially available stent graft to extend the proximal tubular custom-made fenestrated stent graft. The high technical success rate, absence of major adverse events, and low occurrence of complications such as stent graft migration and endoleaks highlight the potential clinical benefits of this approach with an off-the-shelf distal extension whose delivery system does not cross the fenestrations intraoperatively.

Purpose: In some cases of endovascular thoracoabdominal or juxtarenal aortic aneurysm repair, a thoracic endograft in combination with a fenestrated renovisceral device may be needed in order to create a sufficient proximal landing zone. This study aimed to evaluate the technical aspects and postoperative morbidity of a single- or 2-stage approach.

Methods: Eighty-seven consecutive patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in combination with elective fenestrated repair (fenestrated endovascular aortic repair [FEVAR]; fenestrated Anaconda device) from 2015 to 2022 were included in this retrospective bicentric study. Underlying pathologies, aortic morphology, technical details, and postoperative morbidity were recorded.

Results: Single-staged ("1S," n=61) and 2-staged ("2S," n=26) interventions were compared. Indications were thoracoabdominal aneurysms (TAAAs) (Crawford I-IV) (n=56, 64%) and juxtarenal aneurysms (n=31, 36%). In 2S, the proportion of TAAA was higher than in 1S (2S: 77%, 1S: 59%; p=0.001). In 2S, the covered length of the descending aorta was longer (1S: 128±60 mm, 2S: 202±64 mm; p=0.003). Temporary aneurysm sack perfusion (TASP) was established in 11 (18%) of 1S and 1 (4%) of 2S patients (p=0.079), as well as cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) drainage catheter in 48 (79%) of 1S and 19 (73%) of 2S. The rate of spinal cord ischemia (SCI) and the severity of SCI were not different in both groups, with a total of 3 cases of persisting paraplegia. The rate of access complications was higher in 2S (n=6, 23%) than in 1S (n=4, 7%; p=0.027). Postoperative 30 day morbidity did not significantly differ in both groups and neither did 30 day mortality (4.6% in 1S vs 3.8% in 2S; p=0.083).

Conclusion: The combination of TEVAR and FEVAR using a fenestrated endograft is feasible and safe. Aortic morphology does not change significantly after endovascular repair. A single-staged strategy is feasible with excellent results, especially in Crawford IV, Crawford V, or juxtarenal aneurysms. Two-staged repair is recommended in cases with long aortic coverage and a higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class. Follow-up data are needed to evaluate the long-term stability of the TEVAR/FEVAR interconnection.Clinical impactOur study has revealed the safety and efficacy of the combination of TEVAR and FEVAR in the treatment of TAAAs and juxtarenal aneurysms with compromised supravisceral landing zones. A single-staged concept is not necessary in all cases. Staged procedures may reduce postoperative morbidity in cases with long aortic coverage and higher ASA class.

Purpose: This trial was designed and aimed to compare safety and efficacy of Obtura™ vascular closure device (VCD) to manual compression (MC) among patients undergoing transfemoral catheterization.

Material and methods: This prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter trial of Obtura VCD against MC randomized patients in 1:1 (n=268; 134:134) ratio. Safety and efficacy were measured by primary endpoints (time to hemostasis [TTH] and deployment success) and secondary endpoints which included technical success, device-related adverse events, and time to ambulation (TTA).

Results: The procedural access using right femoral artery was performed in 95.52% of patients in Obtura VCD versus 96.27% in standard MC method, whereas 2.99% of patients in each group underwent left femoral access. Bilateral access was performed in 1.49% (n=2) versus 0.75% (n=1) in Obtura VCD versus MC, respectively. Both the technical success and deployment success were 100%. Patients in Obtura VCD group had shorter TTH (3.26±3.39 vs 23.95±8.24 minutes; p<0.0001) and TTA (155.44±125.32 vs 723.84±197.98 minutes; p<0.0001) than MC group. No access site complications (re-bleeding, infection, arteriovenous fistula, and transient access site nerve injury) were noted at 2-week, 1-month, and 3-month follow-ups. There were 4 (3%) and 6 (4.5%) cases of hematoma, respectively, in Obtura VCD versus MC and 1 case (0.7%) of post-procedural arterial pseudoaneurysm each in both the groups which were successfully resolved and patients were discharged with no further complications. Further follow-up was without any adverse events.

Conclusions: The study demonstrated favorable safety and efficacy of Obtura™ VCD with a significantly short TTH and TTA compared to MC.Clinical ImpactIn patients undergoing cardiac catheterization, vascular closure devices (VCDs) can achieve hemostasis faster after successful implantation of the device with fewer complications such as bleeding and ambulation can be achieved faster. In terms of effectiveness, Obtura VCD was found to be better than manual compression in achieving early hemostasis and higher technical and deployment success was accomplished. Obtura VCD does not require enlargement of the route through the tissues, uses the same existing arterial sheath as its conduit, and does not cause patients' access sites to feel uncomfortable while it is being deployed.

Objectives: Type I and III endoleaks following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) can lead to catastrophic events that require major re-interventions. We reviewed our experience with aortic endograft re-interventions for type I and III endoleaks and other serious failures among different devices.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed patients with a prior EVAR who underwent open conversion (OC) or major endovascular intervention (MEI) (re-lining, cuff/limb extension, parallel graft) for type I/III endoleaks at our institution from 2002 to 2019. Baseline characteristics, procedural details, re-interventions, and outcomes were collected.

Results: A total of 229 patients (194 men) underwent re-interventions for type I and III endoleaks after EVAR (90 OC, 139 MEI) for devices implanted between 1997 and 2019. Average age at re-intervention was 78±8.5 years. A total of 135 (59%) were implanted at our institution, whereas 93 (41%) were referred. Median time to re-intervention was 4 years with 25% to 75% interquartile range (IQR) of 2.2-6.6 years. There was no significant difference in baseline demographics or type of re-interventions (OC/MEI) between device types. 42/229 (18%) presented with ruptured aneurysms, 20/229 (9%) were symptomatic, whereas the rest presented with asymptomatic radiographic findings. Type 1A endoleak was present in 146/229 (63.8%-72 with proximal migration), type IB in 46/229 (20.1%), type IIIA in 37/229 (16.6%), type IIIB in 15/229 (6.5%), and persistent aneurysm sac growth with no radiographic evidence of an endoleak in 6/229 (2.6%). Devices included most commercial products: AFX, Excluder, AneuRx, Ancure, Endurant, and Zenith. A smaller number of investigational devices accounted for the rest. Type 1A endoleak was the most common indication for re-intervention among all devices except for AFX and ancure devices, proximal migration was a frequent presentation with AneuRx. AFX devices more frequently presented with a type III and ancure devices more frequently presented with a type IB endoleak.

Conclusions: Serious failure modes after EVAR differ between endografts and occur throughout the follow-up period. This is important to guide targeted interrogation of surveillance studies and follow-up schedules, even for discontinued devices, as well as comparisons between various series and estimation of EVAR failure rates.Clinical ImpactSurveillance after EVAR is critical for long term success of the repair, understanding of the differential modes of failure of every graft available is important in the longitudinal evaluation of these endografts. Equally important is the understanding of the modes of failure of legacy endografts that are no longer on the market but still being followed, in order to be able to tailor a surveillance regiemn and the evntual repair if needed.

Background: Secondary aortic intervention (SAI) following thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is not uncommon. However, a satisfactory management system has not been established for these patients. We aimed to report our single-center experience with SAI after prior TEVAR for type B aortic dissection (TBAD).

Methods: From January 2010 to May 2017, 860 eligible patients with TBAD underwent TEVAR. One hundred seven (12.4%) patients required SAI, either endovascularly (n=76) or surgically (n=31). The main indications for SAI were entry flow (n=58 [54.2%]), aneurysm expansion of the proximal or remote aorta (n=26 [24.3%]), retrograde type A aortic dissection (n=11 [10.3%]), distal stent-graft-induced new entry tear (n=6 [5.6%]), and stent migration (n=4 [3.7%]). The Kaplan-Meier curves were generated to determine the degree of freedom from SAI and the prognosis. Cox proportional hazards were used to screen for risk factors for SAI and poor prognosis.

Results: The overall 30-day mortality rate after SAI was 4.7% (n=5): endovascular (n=2 [2.6%]) vs open surgery (n=3 [9.7%]; p=0.145). The cumulative survival rates with or without SAI were 86.3%±3.6% vs 95.7%±0.8% at 3 years and 82.0%±4.2% vs 92.2%±1.1% at 5 years, respectively (log-rank p<0.001). Although no significant difference in survival was observed, the incidence of SAI was significantly greater in patients who underwent TEVAR during the chronic phase (acute [11.6%] vs subacute [9.6%] vs chronic [27.8]; p<0.001). Multivariate regression analysis revealed that prior TEVAR in the chronic phase (hazard ratio [HR]=1.73, 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.03-2.90; p=0.039), maximum aortic diameter (HR=1.05, 95% CI=1.04-1.07; p<0.001), and arch involvement (HR=1.48, 95% CI=1.01-2.18; p=0.048) were predictors of the incidence of SAI. In addition, the maximum aortic diameter was demonstrated to be the only risk factor for prognosis after adjusting for confounding factors.

Conclusions: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair for chronic TBAD patients should be reconsidered. Open surgery is preferable for those with proximal progression, whereas endovascular treatment is more suitable for distal lesions. Close surveillance and timely reintervention after TEVAR, whether via endovascular techniques or open surgery, are necessary to prevent devastating complications.Clinical ImpactThe management of patients with type B aortic dissection (TBAD) after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is challenging. We summarized our single-center experience regarding secondary aortic intervention after TEVAR for TBAD. We found that TEVAR for chronic TBAD patients should be carefully evaulated, and open surgery is recommended for those with proximal progession, while endovascular treatment is more preferable for distal lesions.